The decision of the 10th Chamber of the Council of State, dated 2025 and numbered 2024/6575 E. and 2025/1374 K. (the “Decision”), was published in the Official Gazette dated 14 June 2025 and numbered 32926.
The Decision was rendered in a case brought against an administrative fine imposed by the Provincial Directorate of Trade on a business, following a complaint filed by a consumer due to a discrepancy between the shelf price and the checkout price at a supermarket.
The dispute includes noteworthy assessments with respect to both the provisions on price labeling under the Law on the Protection of Consumers and the rules governing the adjustment of administrative fines under the Misdemeanors Law.
The consumer identified a discrepancy between the shelf price and the checkout price and filed a complaint.
Following an inspection, the Provincial Directorate of Trade imposed an administrative fine on the business on the grounds that the conduct violated Article 54 of the Law on the Protection of Consumers. However, a dispute arose between the parties as to whether the revaluation rate for that year should be taken into account when calculating the amount of the administrative fine.
The first-instance court found the administrative fine to be lawful and dismissed the case.
Upon the appeal filed by the claimant company, the case file was reviewed by the Council of State.
In its decision, the Council of State summarized its findings as follows:
- It was emphasized that, in cases where there is a discrepancy between the shelf or label price and the checkout price, the lower price must be applied; otherwise, it would constitute a violation of consumer protection regulations and warrant administrative sanctions. The Council of State further stated that interpreting such disputes in favor of the consumer is one of the fundamental principles of consumer law.
- The most significant assessment relates to the amount of the administrative fine imposed.
Citing Article 17 of the Misdemeanors Law, the Council of State held that administrative fines must be adjusted annually by applying the revaluation rate published in accordance with the Tax Procedure Law, effective from the start of each calendar year. - The decision also stated that the failure to take into account the revaluation rate applicable for the relevant year in calculating the administrative fine rendered the sanction unlawful.
It was emphasized that punitive measures must be based not only on a legal ground but also be implemented in compliance with the applicable provisions of the current legislation.
The Council of State held that the failure to apply the revaluation rate announced for the relevant calendar year in calculating the administrative fine was unlawful, and accordingly annulled the fine. As a result, the first-instance court’s decision was overturned and the administrative act was annulled.
The Decision highlights the need for greater diligence in ensuring consistency between shelf prices and checkout prices, particularly for companies operating in the retail and fast-moving consumer goods sectors.
It also clearly establishes that the application of the annual revaluation rates in calculating administrative fines is subject to judicial review, and that failure to do so may constitute grounds for annulment.
It may be said that this decision serves as a precedent not only for consumer transactions, but also more broadly for other administrative fines imposed under the Misdemeanors Law across various fields.
The full text of the decision is available at: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/14.06.2025
Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten
